30
AndrewCuomosEmmy 30 points ago +30 / -0

Bull in a CHY-NA shop, let's gooooooo!

FTFY

0
AndrewCuomosEmmy 0 points ago +2 / -2

This. The new Senate R leader should be Hawley or Blackburn.

2
AndrewCuomosEmmy 2 points ago +2 / -0

Same. Wouldn't mind if all of the states above Texas joined them, South Dakota is looking pretty based. Except for John Thune. Fuck John Thune.

0
AndrewCuomosEmmy 0 points ago +1 / -1

I am sending this as an SOS from Chicago. When the rescue team comes to Chicago, I will have a Pepe on a flag flying out my top window. Can't miss it. Look for me when you come.

6
AndrewCuomosEmmy 6 points ago +6 / -0

He is also a mass murderer. And he got an Emmy for it. That's how I got my username.

8
AndrewCuomosEmmy 8 points ago +9 / -1

Ahahahahahahaha it literally gained as many likes as it lost dislikes. Literal vote flipping.

1
AndrewCuomosEmmy 1 point ago +1 / -0

For your side it's gonna be Pence/Romney

Hate to agree with a shill, but you're probably right. No way they let Trump anywhere near politics again.

2
AndrewCuomosEmmy 2 points ago +2 / -0

This will be all that is left after Biden enacts his gun control legislation. Shovel bows.

4
AndrewCuomosEmmy 4 points ago +4 / -0

One comes from a company owned (or he has some other significant relationship with it) by Bill Gates, a eugenicist. The other, Pfizer's, has developed Bell's Palsy in some of the people who got it, and both seemed very rushed for something to inject yourself with.

19
AndrewCuomosEmmy 19 points ago +19 / -0

The slippery slope is real, and never let anyone tell you otherwise.

1
AndrewCuomosEmmy 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why the fuck did I look that up? Just a warning to pedes, do NOT make the same mistake. However curious you may be, it isn't worth it.

DO NOT READ THE RESPONSE TO THIS COMMENT

3
AndrewCuomosEmmy 3 points ago +3 / -0

I think he's just sarcastic, but it's a damn good impression of a Qtard.

6
AndrewCuomosEmmy 6 points ago +6 / -0

MAN ≠ WOMAN

(Looking at you, Richard Levine)

4
AndrewCuomosEmmy 4 points ago +4 / -0

So you're saying Democrats willingly lost House seats?

Probably. Have to give the American people the illusion of choice by ping-ponging Congress and the White House around every now and then. They weren't ready for Trump 4 years ago.

And why would they only barely win run-offs to barely claim the Senate, requiring a tie-breaking vote from the VP?

Auction off the seats. Whoever gets in won't dare touch the people at the top, might as well make some money off of it.

Why not just steal the Senate by a seat or two?

The Senate is already 99-1 Swamp, and even that could be questionable. Don't know Hawley well enough yet. And Romney, Collins, Murkowski, etc. are essentially Democrats, they have everything they need already.

22
AndrewCuomosEmmy 22 points ago +22 / -0

possibly costing POTUS Trump a majority in the house in 2018 onwards and then re election

There's this little trick, mastered by Democrats after decades of practice. It is called "Printing however many ballots you need to get what you want" and will win any election in which it is done.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›